Which might be more effective 9mm@1200fps or .45@850fps?

From a tactical standpoint, the Glock is the answer. It breaks down much easier if the need for rapid field stripping occurs. It is much lighter and will be unbotrusive with the dark finish. It requires less mental to muscular coordination to fire a shot. The recoil will be substantially less than the chopped .45ACP. The noise level in an enclosed area will be less punishing as well.

I admonish you to find a range that has both and try them on for size. I have found that the .45ACP is best suited for larger,heavier,steel framed pistols. I am not affected by the recoil of a full-sized 1911 variant in a stress fire situation but I assure you that a lightweight polymer or aluminum framed or a cut down steel platform is a different story.

Good Luck

------------------
"When guns are outlawed;I will be an outlaw."
 
I am sick of this crap, it's all about placement or caliber. It is a combination of both. Yeah, a .22 rimfire will kill a man but is it YOUR choice in a carry weapon? Arm yourself with premium, expanding ammunition that feeds reliably and shoots accuratly in your pistol or revolver.

Practice as much as possible, even with that expensive premium ammo you keep in your weapon. Try combat shooting, shooting from barriers, in low light and in any condition that you think you might be in when the SHTF!

The 9mm is a great round but I'd opt for the more daunting .45ACP any day.
 
Well, I'm glad somebody answered the question, unlike the rest of us :)

Of course the answer was "I don't know", so I'm not sure if that was very satisfying to NuclearGlock.

Try www.firearmstactical.com for some info on this subject. Also the MacPherson book "Bullet Penetration" is an excellent source of information. (This book also has some interesting observations re "energy" and "kinetic energy" for those prone to correllate energy with effectiveness).

Of course, YMMV :)
 
Lavan, I beg to differ. A Ford Excursion will have more knockdown power than a Navigator/Expedition, and more momentum, although the Nav/Exped will have more kinetic energy with less horsepower due to it's being ligher and therefore faster than the Excursion.
 
Just a modest suggestion with regard to the original question: I think a definition of what you mean by "effective" would help the good folks here at TFL to know what you're looking for. I know of at least two ways to define what "effective" means with regard to your question.

The only definition that I am aware of which can be measured unabiguously and repeated by anyone with minimal equipment is the question of penetration for a given bullet (and even there, a 124 gr. 9mm JHP from a particular maker's cartrige won't give the same results as another 124 gr. 9mm JHP from a different maker or even a different cartridge with the same bullet from the same maker).

If that's the info you want then I'm sure someone here at TFL can help you; there are also organizations like the Firearms Tactical Institute (www.firearmstactical.com/tactical.htm) that have done the tests and have good information on penetration for various cartridges.

If that's not what you're looking for in terms of "effectiveness", you'll have to define what kind of "effectiveness" you mean to get a useful answer to your question.

Don't mean this to put down your question in any way -- I think it could be a good question once we know better what you're looking for.

Hope this helps.
 
Definition of effectiveness. Ok.
I guess the goal would be to stop an aggressor in his tracks. How do we do that?
Lets say a minimum of 12 inches penetration.
So, my question:
All else being equal (shot placement, etc.),
which of these will penetrate enough to reach vital organs, and shut down an attacker?
1. .45acp from 3.5" bbl Springfield Ultra Compact (185gr)
2. 9mm from 4" bbl Glock 19 (124gr)
Will either or both achieve sufficient penetration to reach vitals? Will either or both expand?
 
For those who are loving on the hardball rounds I can tell you from investigating numerous officer involved shootings with 45 ball that they suck-period. We don't even allow them anymore. Lightweight high speed stuff-it didn't penetrate worth a darn. We found two loads that performed well in our semi autos. 9mm 147gr. JHP, and 230 gr JHP in .45. . I can tell you that all these B.S. little stories about knock down power, etc. are pure fantasy. Use a round that will penetrate bone to get to the vital organs, and you do the best you can. Based on your scenario, I'll take a .45 JHP, if you slow the nine down and go to a 147gr JHP, I'd take that over .45 ball. NYPD can keep their 9mm FMJ's, I wouldn't even consider it. This may just be my opinion, but it is based on real life observations of well over 50 real deal shooting investigations and personal shootings, not just some ammo salesman/gunwriter fantasy.
 
To get right to your question, you are comparing apples and oranges.
The thing is, you are comparing a light and fast variety of 9mm to a slow and heavy variety of .45.
Both calibers will go either way depending on the bullet weight. In other words, take a lighter .45 like the 185 gr and compare it to your 1200 fps 9mm and you are comparing apples and apples.
The thing is, 9mm is never better than .45 in wounding capacity. They both do about the same in penetration etc when comparoing equivelent loads (like a 147gr 9mm compared to a 230 gr .45), they both travel about the same velocity, but the .45 just makes a bigger hole.
You are comparing one of the lighter and faster varieties of the 9mm to the slower variety of the .45. Given the choice in your original question, I would take the .45 because it is going to penetrate deeper and make a bigger hole.

*actually, going back and looking at your question again, you list a 185gr .45 at 850 fps. That is pathetically slow. Even out of a short barrel, that bullet should be moving at well over 1000fps.

[This message has been edited by Red Bull (edited December 30, 1999).]
 
NuclearGlock,

You have to identify the specific round; can't just say "9mm 124 JHP". Different
manufacturers have different design and
performance parameters. The site I directed
you to previously lists much of the information you seek.

Nyeti,

Well said!
 
Actually the most knockdown power will come from a Peterbuilt semitrailer rig... Excursions only a middle weight.

:D LOL!

------------------
"A fear of weapons is a sign of retarded sexual and emotional maturity." - Sigmund Freud
 
dwestfall, people thought the world was flat too until someone had the wisdom and intelligence to see beyond the horizon. Have you checked out the site. There are 2 equal ways of increasing penetration and knockdown power- a small dense relatively lightweigth object moving at a high velocity (anti-tank from a smooth bore sabot round- like what knocked out all those little tanks in the gulf) or a larger object moving at a slower speed. (HE which also knocked out a fair share). Remember Einstein E=mc squared. Nobody thought the .223 from the M-16 could do a better job then the 7.62 from the M-14 but it did under the battlefield conditions specified under the rules of engagement. True the M-16 would not be the first choice where long range shots are called for, but as most gun fights occur at relatively close range, velocity loss and less mass is a mute point. Think of it as getting hit by Foreman's big paw moving in almost slow motion with all that mass behind it, or a Bruce Lee rapid spear hand thrust to your heart. They will both stop you in your tracks. The next question is how to transfer that energy to the medium being attacked. DPS in Texas found they were not getting good penetration through cars (especially windshields and side glass)from their 9mm and .45 and stopping the perp. So, they did their own checking and found out the .357 sig was a better choice for their anticipated need to penetrate glass and/or metal AND then penetrate and stop the perp (high speed, less mass theory). What was that you said about 2" penetration? The guys at NASA are more concerned about the near microscopic particals moving near the speed of light damaging spacecraft then some giant asteroid. It all comes down to physics and what medium you are attacking. He threw out some numbers. I threw out some numbers. If you could get that 230gr. sucker moving at 2000 fps, I suspect there would be a rather large transfer of energy. Then again if it bores through without transfering all it's available energy (say 20%) and my little 95gr. transfers 80% of its energy, who has the most "knockdown power". I'm to tired to do the math right now, but I know which one I would rather be shooting for the sake of my hand. A fire truck hitting you at 60mph would not be pleasant, but the again a 911 hitting you at 150 mph would have about the same effect.

[This message has been edited by ak9 (edited January 04, 2000).]
 
I hate to rain on some parades. Recall the early 1980's attempt on Pres. Reagan? Let me see. He used a .22. One secret service agent was hit and fell on his face. Never touched his gun. A Washington D.C. cop was knocked to the ground. Never touched his gun. Brady smacked the concrete and never mumbled a word. Reagan was shoved in the car and almost died. Not bad for a .22 we love to hate. Could any other gun done much better and this in the hands of an untrained novice shooter.
If it was luck, he sure had a lot of it and should buy Lotto tickets and buy his way out of the nuthouse.
Also someone mentioned a Glock because of the ability to do a rapid break down if needed. If someone can find me a gunfight where you had time to take down your gun for repairs lete me know. It gets kinda silly how far out we want to go to prove a point.
Most shots miss anyway, and in any caliber or bullet style you find failures and successes. One poster talked about how bad the .45 FMJ was. I've been to enough shootings to have a documented number of very sucessful uses of it. Doesn't prove much. The fact NYPD has had no problems with the FMJ in over 300 shootings with their 9mm's sure gives some credence to that choice vs what gun rags tell us. Reality bites. You still gotta hit what you shoot at.

------------------
Specialists in the use and training of lethal force.
 
PlusPInc, obviously "you da man" when it comes to tactics and training. I will stand by the fast take down ability of the Glock versus a chopped 1911 variant. Granted, in the heat of a firefight, the last thing you will think of is taking the pistol apart but from a utilitarian vantage it is a plus. Imagine fighting in the mud of the Houston ship channel in the Gentilly Housing Project in New Orleans (Do not ever go in there unless you are armed btw) with a BG and having your weapon covered in bog. It would be much easier to pull the slide off of a Glock and sling the mud off than to fumble with the loose parts of a 1911 during the aftermath until you could properly clean it.

I am not in love with Glocks but their environmental resistance is excellentand enough to make me seriously consider one should I have the advantage of buying another handgun in the near future.

Bust my chops if need be and keep on imparting your wisdom to those of us like myself who have alot to learn about the fascinating world of handguns.


------------------
"When guns are outlawed;I will be an outlaw."
 
Lavan and Futo Inu,
You're both missing the point. My Chevy S-10 is quicker accelerating, more maneuverable in traffic or parking lots, and has a stealth advantage the Navigator and Excursion behemoths lack. And I challenge any coroner to distinguish the terminal effects of the small pick-up versus the larger SUVs. (assuming proper aim of course)
 
pluspinc, One of the autopsies that I was on (didn't just hear about) the .45 ball rounds went through the BG (all seven of them-some guys can hit) without doing any significan damage. The rounds just kind off pushed their way through the central body cavity and exited. Same crook was then hit in the back by two 147gr. subsonic 9mm's that penetrated deep, expanded, and got near enough to the heart that it tore the aorta and the guy went down. It is just na example. Sure .22's kill, but when is the question. In the Reagan shooting, Brady was hit in the head. Reagan didn't even know he was hit. .22 injuries just tend to be hard to fix. Just my opinion, but most of the small bullet real fast stuff has not performed as well as big bullet at medium. Thats against humans, not cars. Our guys were mainly carrying ball to penetrate cars. All of a sudden they found they could punch cars, but they were having problems dumping crooks.
 
Yes, of course, get the 9mm. It's much more effective than the antiquated 45 ACP.

Anybody who asks a question like this is looking for an excuse to get the 9mm anyway, in MHO.

Ooh! That 45 kicks! Uhnn! Hey, that brass hit me in the forehead! I hate 45s! Damn John Browning and the Horrible COLT company! I always wanted a Glock, anyway!

;) LOL

------------------
Be mentally deliberate but muscularly fast. Aim for just above the belt buckle Wyatt Earp
"It is error alone that needs government support; truth can stand by itself." Tom Jefferson
If you have to shoot a man, shoot him in the guts, it may not kill him... sometimes they die slow, but it'll paralyze his brain and arm and the fight is all but over Wild Bill Hickok
Remember: When you attempt to rationalize two inconsistent positions, you risk drowning as your own sewage backs up.
45 ACP: Give 'em a new navel! BigG
 
There isn't ONE bullet design or caliber out there that doesn't have have cases of total failure in what appears to be the best circumstances. Most shooters love to choose ONE TIME and then use it as a normal measure of effectiveness. I had a suspect take two .44 mags to the chest and blew a part of a rib out of the back of his shirt and he was leaning on a car swearing when I arrived. So do we assume the .44 magnum is a failure. BTW he shot and killed the other guy with ONE shot from a .22 revolver. So we can now assume the .22 is superior? Let us please leave the "one time" school of logic in the dust.
As for experince, In the early 90's I toured american from Minneapolis to San Diego across to Savanah Ga to Detroit to Mpls. I toured and rode with cops in 29 of America's worst ghetto's from Cabrini Green and Taylor Projects in Chicago, to Detroit. Added in years of experience as a cop and news reporter in the 60's with experience from riots in Detroit (July 67) to Chicago Democratic convention in 68, I've seen my share of violence and shootings not counting those I've been involved in myself.
What you learn from EXPERIENCE is consistant threads of what works and what is effective.
One thing I did learn was how effective the .22 is when it comes to shootings and even riots. I fear the .22 more than all others because it has low recoil, hard to locate the source of the shot and can be darned effective at several bocks distance and when it hits you it will screw you up big time. Not ideal of course, but you have and must respect what it will do.
As for the .45 acp you also learn in the streets that it works far more often than it fails in all bullet types. Yup, you can find those "one times" but if you look at decades of experience and have to make a choice it becomes pretty easy.
Also as far as tearing down a Glock or any gun in a REAL encounter that is pure nonsensical Disney Land logic. You are more apt to get asked for a date by Pam Anderson, and your odds of getting "lucky" would be much better.
 
I like to think that bullets are as much tools as guns themselves. Is there a place for .22, sure. And as you stated, .45 works. I have just found that JHP's work far better than ball as a strictly anti personnel round. I have zero belief in magic knockdown power, I just like to see something that does a good deal of ripping and tearing in a permanent wound cavity, and the bigger the hole the better. I have never carried anything but a .45 (in both revolver and auto) as a duty gun, and it has served me well. I do carry 9mm and .40 for other missions because they are better suited. Sorry, but I don't have a .22, I have no use for them in any scenario that I would need them. Others may have. I think the point is to really look hard at the mission and go from there.

------------------
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top